Não Cobiçarás a Mulher Alheia

The first work I see by Garso Kanin, he directs this film that goes from a comedy tone to a gray love drama. It stars Charles Laughton and Carole Lombard supported by William Gargan.

It is a film that stays in the middle, it starts out well, it is entertaining but it develops taking as understood situations that are not clear. The development of the Lombard and Gargan couple is taken by the hair, there is no moment where they connect and unless a deep problem arises. The problem of pregnancy is taken for granted and one does not know when it happened.

Remarkable performances although the script did not help much and the 3 characters are flat without much to say. Charles Laughton is surprising because at first it seems not to be very interesting and ends up being the moral. Carole is fine and looks as natural as possible despite the forced scenes she's in. Gargan in this role that begins lonely and mysterious but is halfway through development. He is nominated for 'Best Supporting Actor' at the Oscars and is the only nomination the film gets.

I saw this old movie around the late 50s on Australian television. Aged about twelve, I thought Charles Laughton was just about the best actor of all time.

Putting his performance as Tony Petucci into context, back then we regularly saw movies he made in the 30s and 40s. Charles took on roles almost like Theatresports' challenges. One minute he's tossing chicken bones over his shoulder as Henry Vlll, next he's Captain Bligh sneeringly offering cheese to Mr Christian. Then we get Inspector Javert in "Les Mis" with an expression as though his piles were active.

The guy just jumped into character after character. Most amazingly, he was Quasimodo swinging on the bells in "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" and plenty of others. What other big star stepped so far from their comfort zone so often? Clark Gable used to balk at shaving off his moustache for a role or growing one.

Hitchcock once said, "You couldn't direct Laughton, only hope to referee him". In "They Knew What They Wanted", Charle's Tony was definitely at the extreme end of the Hollywood Italian stereotype, but maybe some of it was down to the very contrived situations. Simon Callow in his superb dissection of Charles Laughton's life and career, "A Difficult Actor", tells how the actor worked hard at the part, often derided by director and cast.

However for such an unathletic looking guy, you have to admire Laughton's agility and strength especially in the party scene. At least they didn't have a grape stomping scene.

If you want to feel better about Laughton's portrayal, check out Edward G Robinson in the earlier version of the story, "A Lady to Love". It's as though Edward G had never met a real Italian.

Against Laughton's fireworks the other actors underplayed almost to the point of inertia. Maybe Lombard hit the right note as Amy, whose empty life is summed up when she reluctantly finds a moment of passion with the uncharismatic Joe (William Gargan). Frank Fay's Father McKee is just weird, more like a morals commissar than a priest.

Still, Napa Valley looks fine and we have a good Alfred Newman score. The film has a better second half, and an ending that is strangely bittersweet.

This is the third filmed version of Sidney Howard's play. Previously this was filmed a THE SECRET HOUR (1928) with Pola Negri and Jean Hersholt and as A LADY TO LOVE (1930) with Vilma Banky and Edward G. Robinson.

Here, Charles Laughton plays the Italian Tony, a successful grape grower in Napa Valley. He goes to San Francisco and is smitten with a waitress named Amy (Carole Lombard) and decides to marry her. Back home he gets his pal (William Gargan) to write a letter. She answers back. Eventually they send a picture and invite her to Napa.

Unfortunately they send a picture of Gargan. But Lombard has nothing to go back to but her dreary and demeaning job so she stays. Despite her best efforts she falls for Gargan right under Robinson's nose.

Basically a love triangle story, there's enough humor to defuse the slightly clichéd story. Lombard give a great performance as the feisty Amy. Laughton is hammy and loud but a pleasure to watch. Gargan won an Oscar nomination for the hapless Joe, torn between his devotion to Tony and his love for Amy.

Supporting cast includes Harry Carey as the doctor, Frank Fay as the priest, Victor Kilian as the photographer, Janet Fox as Mildred, and the film debuts of Karl Malden and Tom Ewell.

Good location shooting in Napa Valley opens up the film and adds a nice touch.

even taking into account the context of its time, this is incredibly dated, morals-wise. also, it strains credibility that the female protagonist (amy) would stay initially, stay later, stay longer, proclaim her love for (the wrong guy), and then leave w/o getting together w/who she wanted all along. just seems really dopily contrived. "she DIDN'T know what she wanted" would be a more apt title. also, the whole plot revolving about her pregnancy just comes from out of nowhere and dominates the proceedings as if it was 1750 in puritan new england. i really wanted to like this film; i'd heard it was good - - but it's really pretty hard to take. as for tony; he's similarly unbelievable, a 1-dimensional character, until he explodes, and then he becomes 2-dimensional (still 1 short). OK i'm done

"A Lady To Love" (1930) with some key differences.

Tony (Charles Laughton) is a simple yet successful Italian immigrant who owns a large grape farm in California. After he sees beautiful waitress Amy (Carole Lombard) during a trip to the city, Tony falls hopelessly in love, and he enlists his best friend and foreman Joe (William Gargan) in composing love letters to Amy to convince her to marry Tony. They succeed, but when Tony sends a picture of Joe instead of himself to Amy, things get complicated, as she arrives already in love with the image of Joe to only be told that the real Tony is something altogether different

I recently watched A Lady to Love from 1930, the earlier screen version of this story starring Edward G. Robinson, Vilma Banky and Robert Ames in the lead roles, so I spent a lot of time watching this version and comparing the two. This later version is better, but there are several changes to story points: in the early version, Amy marries Tony immediately upon arrival, while in this version they never actually get around to it. Tony gets injured in both versions, but the circumstances and outcomes are much different. And one very pertinent plot point which I won't spoil was absent in the early version, but very much a factor in this later one.

Lombard is very good in a serious role, and while Laughton is very broad, his role calls for it and his scenery chewing is acceptable, and not nearly as bad as Robinson's was. William Gargan earned an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor, although his role is really a lead, and he even has more screentime than Laughton. Gargan is good, but not in a flashy way, and his role is one that seems like an odd choice for a nomination. It may have been a career acknowledgment, as he'd been a popular B-level leading man since the late 1920's. He was the real deal, too, when it came to tough guy roles, as he'd been both a bootlegger and a detective before he started in pictures. His movie career ran out of steam by the late 1940's, when he moved to radio and had a big hit with Martin Kane, Private Eye, a role that he also played on TV in the late 50's. A battle with throat cancer left him without a voice by 1960, although he lived until 1979.